Then, the interviewer went on by asking four direct questions concerning the same new information as for the four claims in the Scharff conditions e. The direct questions were even presented if the participant had touched upon the information before. Interviewers Two interviewers one female and one male were instructed in conducting these particular interviews and trained in a pilot study.
The interviewers strictly followed the interview protocols and used a few phrases in order to handle unanticipated situations. Each interviewer conducted approximately half of the interviews in each condition. Post-interview questionnaires Before the three post-interview questionnaires were administered sequentially, it was made clear that the role-playing part of the study was over.
The participants were also asked to rate how motivated they were during the interview on a scale from 1 not at all motivated to 9 very motivated. The second questionnaire consisted of a checklist with all available information 35 units. Participants were asked to mark the information they perceived to have been revealed during the interview. The third questionnaire contained the same checklist, and the participants were asked to tick the information that they believed was already known to the interviewer prior to the interview.
Coding of the interviews Each interview was coded in terms of what information the participant revealed during the interview range: 0 to 35 units. The interview was divided into three phases in order to analyse how much each particular phase contributed to the amount of new information. For the second phase, we scored all new information revealed as a result of the four claims or direct questions ranging from 0 to 4.
Ambiguous responses e. For the Direct Approach, information was only scored if the participant answered a direct question accurately e. Furthermore, we determined the degree of precision of the new information revealed. Therefore, we assigned the 22 pieces of new information to one of eight themes and weighted them with a factor running from 1 to 3 the more precise the information, the higher the value. One theme contained a maximum of three pieces of information, and only the most precise piece of information of each theme was counted with its new value.
The maximum possible degree of precision by a participant was 23 seven themes with a maximum value of 3 and one theme with a maximum value of 2. No such interviewer effects were found. Thus, Hypothesis 1 was supported. Hence, Hypothesis 2a was not supported. Thus, Hypothesis 2b found no support. For all means and SDs, see Table 1. Thus, Hypothesis 3 was not supported.
Thus, Hypothesis 4a was supported. Thus, Hypothesis 4b was only partially supported. Relating objective and subjective measures A mixed ANOVA with the three interview conditions as the between-subjects factor and the new information revealed scores objective and subjective as the within-subjects factor was conducted.
The interaction was analysed further by using simple effect tests for each interview condition. Thus, Hypothesis 5 was supported. For an illustration of the interaction effect, see Figure 1. Figure 1. In sharp contrast, for the Direct Approach, more than half of the participants In general, we were able to show that the Scharff-technique outperformed the Direct Approach on most measures examined.
We believe it makes sense to argue that the illusion of knowing it all-tactic played a crucial role. Because of the management dilemma, the sources aimed to be perceived as co-operative and thus reported new information that went beyond the information mentioned by the interviewer. In contrast, the sources in the Direct Approach were blind to which information the interviewer already held and revealed a mix of old and new information. Finally, there was no difference between the three conditions for the third phase of the interview.
A likely explanation is that the sources had already revealed the infor- mation that they had planned to reveal earlier during the interview. This difference indicates a successful implementation of the illusion of knowing it all-tactic in general and supports the explanation that the sources in the Scharff condi- tions felt prompted to reveal new information.
We believe that the illusion of knowing it all-tactic needs further improvement in order to give the source the impression that the interviewer is holding more information than actually is the case. Therefore, they might perceive that almost all the information revealed is new to the interviewer and hence overestimate the amount of new information revealed.
However, the Scharff-technique is tailored to counteract these counter-interrogation strategies and thus might be more effective in real-life settings compared with lab settings. Second, we did not weight the relative importance of each individual theme of information.
It might be worthwhile to develop a coding system, which includes the level of precision within each individual theme and also the relative importance of the different themes. Critically, we consider the Direct Approach as an appropriate control condition because it covers different facets of commonly used questions.
Fourth, even though it is nonetheless of practical value, the sources in the current study were not allowed to fabricate information. Fifth, all interviews were conducted over the phone, and the participants had all background information in front of them.
The source could gather the more probable piece of information in an interview and use it for his or her purposes e. Finally, there are many different forms of human intelligence interactions, and the Scharff-technique as it is examined here is primarily aimed for settings where the source is expecting to be questioned. Of note, the Scharff-technique is a non-coercive intelligence gathering technique, which puts a premium on a friendly approach and a not pressing for information.
The sources interviewed by the Scharff-technique underestimated how much new information they revealed, whereas the sources interviewed by the Direct Approach overestimated how much new information they revealed. The present study shows that the Scharff-technique is a promising interview technique for eliciting intelligence but that further research is needed and worthwhile. Approaching truth: Behavioral science lessons on educing information from human sources. Fein, P.
Vossekuil Eds. Interrogation: science and Art. Foundations for the future. Intelligence science board. Phase 1 report pp. Coulam, R. Furthermore, we have not yet mapped the degree of precision of the new information revealed, as this measure is easily confounded with the quantity of information. This might be viewed as a limitation since, in real life, information on one theme is often more critical than information on another.
Additionally, as our studies relied on structured interview protocols and quite short interactions we have assuredly missed out on some of the dynamic aspects of a typical HUMINT interview. Finally, we acknowledge a few limitations pertaining to the Scharff technique in general. First, in some situations revealing what and how much intelligence is held on a certain topic would be a clear tactical mistake. For example, if the sources are not being held in custody they could be deployed by colleagues to find out what intelligence is held on their group and its planned activities.
However, the current study showed that the illusion of knowing-it-all can be established by outlining rather Downloaded by [University of Gothenburg] at 16 November general background information. Hence, it may be possible to establish a convincing illusion without disclosing particularly detailed or sensitive information. Second, in some situations the Scharff technique would be rather difficult to use.
For example, possessing accurate information is necessary to properly paint the illusion of knowing-it-all. Third, the Scharff technique is aimed primarily at custodial settings where the source expects to be questioned. Hence, the results of the current study may not be satisfactorily generalized to apply to HUMINT activities taking place outside a custodial setting.
This conclusion has substantial implications for the interrogation practitioner. Equally important, however, is the process by which we reached that conclusion. Much of the customary knowledge that exists within the law enforcement and intelligence communities about what is or is not effective in eliciting reliable information through interrogation is not evidence-based.
Longstanding protocols comprising untested strategies continue to be taught to new generations of police and intelligence officers, employed by current practitioners, and required by senior management.
While learning and applying the current strategies of customary knowledge is a requirement, no similar requirement is in place to objectively assess their efficacy through established methods of scientific inquiry. For example, we can support our conclusions with properly collected and analyzed data that establish causal relationships. The subjective nature of reflective analysis arises from two primary cognitive biases.
First is the fundamental attribution error. The way people remember their actions is as indelibly shaped by what they intended to do as by what they actually did. Second is the availability bias. When thinking about the probability of an event occurring e. In sum, to gather the narrative recollections of experienced practitioners in the effort to better understand the inherent complexities of the interrogation process can be of enormous value; however, conflating the reported correlations with causation can be a most precarious path to follow.
We believe the Scharff technique, as conceptualized in the present research, has immediate operational relevance. In brief, the Scharff technique has wide applications, for example in gathering both strategic and tactical level information, and can be used with a number of different types of sources, including prisoners of war, detainees, suspects, and informants.
Revealing the merits of the Scharff technique also adds to the operational relevance by offering a much fuller description of the technique than the limited treatment found in the current version of the U. Several initiatives have been taken toward ending the use of these unethical methods. For example, President Barack Obama made it clear that American intelligence interrogators operating in support of an armed conflict can use only the methods described in the Army Field Manual.
In fact, few of its listed interrogation methods have been subjected to scientific evaluation. As a result, customary knowledge—in the absence of scientific knowledge—has directly informed what is now the overarching guideline for interrogations conducted by U. Our present research, augmented by an increasing body of similar studies,56,57 has demonstrated that the approach strategies set forth in the Army Field Manual can be objectively and meaningfully examined to establish—or refute—their purported efficacy.
Looking forward, the series of studies that have examined the Scharff Downloaded by [University of Gothenburg] at 16 November technique also provide a useful model for examining and testing other examples of excellence in interrogation operations.
Detailed reporting—to include books, journal articles, and case studies—has documented the activities of other interrogators whose efforts have been described as exceptionally effective. Retired U. Army Colonel Stuart Herrington,58 for example, described in detail the interrogation methods he employed during the Vietnam War.
Similarly, Orrin DeForest59 provided a fascinating account of his interrogation strategies during that same conflict. Other accounts of interrogation operations conducted during various military operations since the Vietnam War and up through the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan provide extensive details regarding strategies, methodologies, context, and outcomes, and lend themselves to a similar systematic deconstruction, modeling, and objective testing.
The empirical findings emerging from our research on the Scharff technique seek to help fill the gap in the scientific literature. In brief, we have shown that the Scharff technique consistently outperforms the Direct Approach on the most critical efficacy measures.
The combined evidence marks the Scharff technique as an effective tool for eliciting human intelligence. Statements of fact, opinion and analysis in the article are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the FBI or the U. Atglen: Schiffer Publishing Ltd. Fein, ed. Interrogation: Science and Art. Justice, Sujeeta Bhatt, Susan E. Brandon, and Steven M. Kleinman, Army Field Manual Galinsky, William W.
Maddux, Debra Gilin, and Judith B. Verschuere, eds. Redlich, Christopher E. Norton, Evans, Kate A. Houston, Christian A. Meissner, Amy B. Ross, Julia R.
LaBianca, Skye A. Woestehoff, and Steven M. Eliciting human intelligence: A conceptualization and empirical testing of the Scharff technique By Simon Oleszkiewicz. DOI: PLoS One. Proceedings of the Royal Society B. Neuron Dec 18;80 6 Epub Nov Front Neural Circuits. Epub Feb Edited by: Ralph L Holloway.
Frontiers in Evolutionary Neuroscience , Vol. Garcia-Calero E, Scharff C Calbindin expression in developing striatum of zebra finches and its relation to the formation of Area X. BMC Biology , , doi Scharff C, Adam I Neurogenetics of birdsong. Current Opinion in Neurobiology , dx. Results from interactive playback experiments. Frontiers in Zoology B 00, doi Curr Opin Neurobiol Dec 20 6 : Epub Nov 9.
Nat Rev Neurosci. Ethology pdf-download KB. Nature , 1 April doi Epub Mar
0コメント